Human exposure and mass balance distribution during procymidone application in horticultural greenhouses

Human exposure and mass balance distribution during procymidone application in horticultural greenhouses

The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of procymidone application in periurban horticultural greenhouses, especially on workers (applicators and assistants) and soil and plastic mulching, when mechanically pressurized application systems were employed. The mean Potential Dermal Exposure...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Heliyon Vol. 6; no. 1; p. e03093
Main Authors: Fitó Friedrichs, Gretel, Berenstein, Giselle, Nasello, Soledad, Dutra Alcoba, Yohana Y., Hughes, Enrique A., Basack, Silvana, Montserrat, Javier M.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01-01-2020
Elsevier
Subjects:
Eisenia andrei
Environmental chemistry
Environmental pollution
Environmental risk assessment
Exposure
Horticulture
MOS
PDE
Pesticide
Procymidone
Soil
PDE
MOS
Environmental risk assessment
Horticulture
Pesticide
Environmental pollution
Procymidone
Eisenia andrei
Environmental chemistry
Soil
Exposure
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of procymidone application in periurban horticultural greenhouses, especially on workers (applicators and assistants) and soil and plastic mulching, when mechanically pressurized application systems were employed. The mean Potential Dermal Exposure (PDE) was measured using the Whole Body Dosimetry technique. The PDE for the applicators was 188 mL h−1 ± 103 mL h−1, and 14.7 mL h−1 ± 6.3 mL h−1 for the assistants. In the first case, the most exposed body sections were the upper right and left (46.8 mL h−1 ± 23.4 mL h−1; 47.0 mL h−1 ± 23.5 mL h−1) and lower (20.8 mL h−1 ± 10.4 mL h−1; 17.3 mL h−1 ± 8.7 mL h−1) legs, while in the case of assistants, hands and legs were the most impacted limbs. Regarding the Margin of Safety (MOS) during the mix and load stage, two of three pesticide preparations resulted unsafe, while for the applicators, six of six spraying operations were unsafe. For the assistants, five of five operations were safe, but three of them were close to the safety limit. Procymidone distribution between drift (0.03% ± 0.07 %), applicator (0.20% ± 0.15 %), polyethylene mulching (8.5% ± 4.5 %) and soil (3.0% ± 1.1 %) was determined with respect to the total pesticide applied. Procymidone soil impact was also evaluated using Eisenia andrei behavioral tests, finding positive correlations between procymidone application and avoidance and reproduction tests. Horticulture; Pesticide; Environmental chemistry; Environmental pollution; Environmental risk assessment; Procymidone; Exposure; PDE; MOS; Soil; Eisenia andrei
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:2405-8440
2405-8440
DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e03093